Hi,
I agree with Daniela's point about potential ambiguity. My understanding
is that each "run" of a test must map to exactly one technique. The
"run" consists of the rule, the technique, and the expected outcome.
These are one entity, and a technique is actually a (WCAG 2.0-specific)
refinement of a rule.
My proposal would be to keep the technique element within the locations
element but to allow no more than one instance per locations element
(for this Task Force, a technique must be provided). Hence, each
location within the locations element would mark exactly one instance of
the outcome of a "run".
The way to point to multiple techniques from within one test sample
would be to have multiple locations element per rule element. I am not
sure if this is supported by TCDL 2.0 though. Here is an example:
<rule id="ruleID">
<locations>
<technique xlink:href="techniqueID">
<!--// exactly one instance //-->
</technique>
<location>
<!--// one occurence //-->
</location>
<location>
<!--// another occurence //-->
</location>
<!--// more occurences //-->
</locations>
<!--// other locations //-->
</rule>
A different approach all together would be to have a new rule element
for a new technique (= new "run"). However, I think there is a
restriction on how the rule elements are combined in TCDL 2.0.
Regards,
Shadi
cstrobbe wrote:
> Hi Daniela,
>
> Quoting Daniela Ortner <Daniela.Ortner@jku.at>:
>> you wrote that with the first option ('techniques' in 'locations'
>> after
>> 'location') we would be able to describe how a location and a
>> certain
>> technique relate. The current schema would allow the following:
>>
>> <locations>
>> <location>
>> </location>
>> <location>
>> </location>
>> ...
>> <technique>
>> </technique>
>> <technique>
>> </technique>
>> ...
>> </locations>
>>
>> But what does that indicate? That the first <location> belongs to
>> the
>> first <technique>?
>> I see no possibility to express relationship between a location and
>> a
>> technique from this example.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be better to construct something like:
>>
>> <locations>
>> <location>
>> <technique>
>> </technique>
>> <technique>
>> </technique>
>> ...
>> </location>
>> <location>
>> <technique>
>> </technique>
>> <technique>
>> </technique>
>> ...
>> </location>
>> ...
>> </locations>
>>
>> Looking forward to read your thoughts on that...
>
> That idea also crossed my mind, but we already have EARL pointers
> inside location (with an <xs:all> group). If we want to go down this
> road, it would look like this:
>
> <locations>
> <location>
> <!-- EARL pointers here -->
> <techniques>
> <technique />
> <technique />
> </techniques>
> </location>
> <location>
> <!-- EARL pointers here -->
> <techniques>
> <technique />
> <technique />
> </techniques>
> </location>
> </locations>
>
> Do people like this approach?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Christophe
>
>> Regards,
>> Daniela
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> cstrobbe <Christophe.Strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be> 17.10.2006
>> 18:30:03
>> Hi,
>>
>> While cleaning up the last issues in TCDL, I noticed a curious bug/
>> feature in the schema:
>> 'techniques' can be added
>> * either in 'locations' (after 'location', which is the first child
>> element of 'locations'),
>> * or in 'rule', after 'locations'.
>>
>> The second option is what I originally proposed [1], but the first
>> option would allow us to describe more accurately how a 'location'
>> and
>>
>> certain 'techniques' relate, especially if a test case uses several
>> techniques in different locations. The latter may not be a use case
>> in
>>
>> this task force, but it would be interesting for BenToWeb or other
>> test
>>
>> suite efforts. Are there any objections to removing 'techniques' from
>>
>> 'rule' and allowing it only in 'locations'?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Christophe
>>
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2006Sep/
>>
>> 0019.html
>>
>>
>> --
>> Christophe Strobbe
>> K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group
>> on
>>
>> Document Architectures
>> Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM
>> tel: +32 16 32 85 51
>> http://www.docarch.be/
>>
>> Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Shadi Abou-Zahra Web Accessibility Specialist for Europe |
Chair & Staff Contact for the Evaluation and Repair Tools WG |
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) http://www.w3.org/ |
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), http://www.w3.org/WAI/ |
WAI-TIES Project, http://www.w3.org/WAI/TIES/ |
Evaluation and Repair Tools WG, http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/ |
2004, Route des Lucioles - 06560, Sophia-Antipolis - France |
Voice: +33(0)4 92 38 50 64 Fax: +33(0)4 92 38 78 22 |